> Essentially XML ID but disjunct from any xml:base contamination.
This then leaves one issue I can see (there may be othes ...)
If an RDF processor reads in the same file twice, are the bNodes the same or
different?
For compatibility with current RDF syntax, implicit bNodes in the current
syntax yield different bnodes in the graph created. But there is a choice
as to whether an explicit bNode (one labeled in the syntax) is scoped to the
file read operation (and hence creates different bNodes) or whether they get
unique labels in the disjoint space.
If RDF is to be exchanged between systems across a newtork using a
serialization then the latter is desirable. It means part of the system (an
RDF application) on one machine can talk about the bNodes on another machine
(the source of the graph).
Andy
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Stickler [mailto:patrick.stickler@nokia.com]
Sent: 5 June 2002 10:24
To: RDF Interest
Subject: Re: N3 and N-Triples (was: RDF in HTML: Approaches)
On 2002-06-05 11:56, "ext Andy Seaborne" <andy.seaborne@hp.com> wrote:
> (1) have attribute rdf:bnode='a' (c.f. rdf:resource) or
Right. Essentially XML ID but disjunct from any xml:base contamination.
Though I think that it will be necessary to revise the
RDF/XML serialization model to (a) use vocabulary and
structure that reflects the graph model more
closely, and (b) do away with the use of qnames for
any resources, sticking strictly to URIs, and any
qnames are objects of the serialization model, not
the graph model.
Cheers,
Patrick
--
Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com